Department of Urology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, 11 Jalan Tan Tock Seng, Singapore, 308433, Singapore.
Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS), Paris, France.
World J Urol. 2024 Oct 30;42(1):606. doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05297-3.
Flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths (FANS) have been introduced without current evidence on how to optimize deflection. Aim was to evaluate in vitro deflection angles with 2 different FANS techniques-sheath advancement and ureteroscope deflection; and effects of sheath size-ureteroscope combinations.
We evaluated in vitro deflection angles of 10/12Fr, 11/13Fr and 12/14Fr FANS (Hunan Reborn Medical Co. Ltd) with six single-use flexible ureteroscopes (Pusen Uscope 7.5Fr, OTU WiScope 7.5Fr, OTU WiScope 8.6Fr, Innovex EU-scope 8.7Fr, Red Pine RP-U-C12 8.7Fr and Boston Scientific Lithovue 9.5Fr). Two deflection techniques were tested: (1) sheath advancement-advancing the sheath forward over a maximally deflected ureteroscope, and (2) ureteroscope deflection-maximally deflecting the ureteroscope from various starting positions relative to tip of the sheath.
Intra and inter-scope comparisons of maximum deflection angles were significantly different (all ANOVA p < 0.01). Largest maximum angles for all ureteroscopes were with the sheath advancement technique (range 218°-277°), and second largest for most scopes using the ureteroscope deflection technique at tip (range 111°-212°), mostly deviating from manufacturer specifications (range 270°-275°). 10/12Fr and 11/13Fr sheath sizes were more flexible than 12/14Fr. Largest angles were with 11/13Fr sheath-OTU8.6Fr/Innovex8.7Fr combinations.
Optimal deflection with FANS is achieved using either a sheath advancement technique, or ureteroscope deflection technique at tip. Despite using these optimized techniques, deflection angles specified by manufacturers seem hardly achievable. The sheath advancement technique and 11/13Fr sheath-OTU8.6Fr/Innovex8.7Fr combinations may be better suited for lower pole situations. Urologists should be aware of these differences and apply the findings to their FANS technique.
可弯曲、可导航的输尿管吸引鞘(FANS)已被引入,但目前尚无关于如何优化其弯曲度的证据。本研究旨在评估两种不同的 FANS 技术(鞘推进和输尿管镜弯曲)以及鞘-输尿管镜尺寸组合对弯曲角度的影响。
我们评估了 10/12Fr、11/13Fr 和 12/14Fr 输尿管镜(湖南瑞邦医疗器械有限公司)在 6 根一次性使用软性输尿管镜(Pusen Uscope 7.5Fr、OTU WiScope 7.5Fr、OTU WiScope 8.6Fr、Innovex EU-scope 8.7Fr、Red Pine RP-U-C12 8.7Fr 和 Boston Scientific Lithovue 9.5Fr)下的弯曲角度。我们测试了两种弯曲技术:(1)鞘推进——在最大限度弯曲的输尿管镜上向前推进鞘;(2)输尿管镜弯曲——从鞘尖端的各种起始位置最大限度地弯曲输尿管镜。
所有输尿管镜的最大弯曲角度的内-间比较差异均有统计学意义(所有方差分析 P<0.01)。所有输尿管镜的最大弯曲角度均采用鞘推进技术(范围为 218°-277°),大多数输尿管镜采用输尿管镜弯曲技术在尖端(范围为 111°-212°),这两种技术的最大弯曲角度与制造商的规格(范围为 270°-275°)相差较大。10/12Fr 和 11/13Fr 鞘尺寸比 12/14Fr 更灵活。最大弯曲角度出现在 11/13Fr 鞘-OTU8.6Fr/Innovex8.7Fr 组合中。
采用鞘推进技术或输尿管镜尖端弯曲技术均可实现 FANS 的最佳弯曲。尽管采用了这些优化技术,但制造商规定的弯曲角度似乎难以实现。鞘推进技术和 11/13Fr 鞘-OTU8.6Fr/Innovex8.7Fr 组合可能更适合下极情况。泌尿科医生应了解这些差异,并将这些发现应用于其 FANS 技术。